Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sky Hunter
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 18:48:00 -
[1]
I know im usually against whining threads, but this one became something i cant go past.
Over past week i encounterd various BSs with various setups and from various corps/alliances. But in 80% of cases, if BS was engaging me he had at least 2 Heavy nosfs.
This is for sure means 'no go' for almost any HAC. I mean ok, people use nosfs now against NPCs, but not when a pilot slaps a nosferatu on every BS he can get into.
Im not whinin about 'omg i cant kill BS', im just disappointed that Heavy nosferatu is now BS 'top used' module.
So even tho i cant think about any wise change proposition, but ill try few(those are separated suggestion not all-in-one):
1. Increase cycle time of nosfs from 12sec to 24secs. It will give some recharge time for BCs/T2 BCs/HACs to be able to relay on to at least keep guns running.
2. Inrease power grid usage on named nosfs and on T1 nosf. From 2000 to lets say 2300.
3. Maybe make nosfs speed-up. For example the more time you nosf someone, the more energy you get. For example first cycle gives you only 40 cap, then next cycle gives you 50 and so on. Maybe even make some chance based nosfing but make it so nosf will still drain cap, but drain differnt amounts. For example 100-20-50-60-40-80 or something like this.
Again this is not whine topic. Its juts something i wanna ask if someone else been seeing alot of nosfing on BS lately. -=-
|
Paigan
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 18:56:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Paigan on 07/02/2006 18:56:31 I think the problem is that there is no way of "cap hardening". A NOS will always drain your cap and you can't do anything against it, even if you know you will encounter it.
As a potential HAC victim, i'm very glad about it. From the balance point of view, it's kinda sad.
It should be different. I like your point 3 pretty much. But i surrendered complaining or wishing needed changes, as the most obvious things are never done, as it seems.
-- This game is still in beta stage |
Jennifae
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 18:59:00 -
[3]
all it does if force you to fit nosses too. thus returning the cap transfer to a neutral state of no gain or loss.
|
Jennifae
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:00:00 -
[4]
OR...you can get creative. fit one nos and maybe a cap injector. Now you've freed up a high slot and maybe have an edge over the two nos user in terms of possibly having more damage than he will bring to the table.
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:02:00 -
[5]
nos are fine.
make nos effect smaller ships less and u force yet more people into hacs.
and they will indeed be the new i win buttons.
dont change nos, maybe increase it to 150 for best named per 12sec from 120 but make it take some cap to activeate. thus if u nos something with no cap u actually take cap away from yourself
|
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:08:00 -
[6]
Quote: Nos are fine
aka Lalala, i don't hear you....
* Are Heavy Energy Destabilizers and Vampires too powerful? * Capital Nosferatu * Anti-nosferatu defense * we need anti-nos mod * Nos Penalty in Developmnent * Nosferatu and PVP * Nos/Neuts * Nos? * Nos stacking penalty?
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:11:00 -
[7]
so? any module that works as anti smaller ship will be widely used so stop whining.
unless you want ship sized warp disruptors and webifiers (yes i think that is fair too, your hac shouldnt be able to warp disrupt a battleship) i suggest you to stop whining becouse if i got no defense against a smaller target a smaller target sure as hell should not have a chance against me either.
"We brake for nobody"
|
Paigan
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:15:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock so? any module that works as anti smaller ship will be widely used so stop whining.
unless you want ship sized warp disruptors and webifiers (yes i think that is fair too, your hac shouldnt be able to warp disrupt a battleship) i suggest you to stop whining becouse if i got no defense against a smaller target a smaller target sure as hell should not have a chance against me either.
Nice point.
Balance, logic and realism would be to make ship sized webifiers, scramblers and defense methods against NOSs. Because i don't like getting scrambled by a lousy frigate and i don't like that you are not able to do anything against NOSs (even though i'm one of the heavy NOS users...)
Whats the point in saying "those two imbalances make each other balanced"? -- This game is still in beta stage |
Necrologic
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:19:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock so? any module that works as anti smaller ship will be widely used so stop whining.
unless you want ship sized warp disruptors and webifiers (yes i think that is fair too, your hac shouldnt be able to warp disrupt a battleship) i suggest you to stop whining becouse if i got no defense against a smaller target a smaller target sure as hell should not have a chance against me either.
Read some of the links NaughtyBoy posted. Your argument is said many times in them and is ripped to shreds.
|
Berrik Radhok
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:24:00 -
[10]
I use two heavy nos all the time. With them I am guranteed to leave any interceptor trying to tackle me dead in the water :)
|
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:27:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Necrologic
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock so? any module that works as anti smaller ship will be widely used so stop whining.
unless you want ship sized warp disruptors and webifiers (yes i think that is fair too, your hac shouldnt be able to warp disrupt a battleship) i suggest you to stop whining becouse if i got no defense against a smaller target a smaller target sure as hell should not have a chance against me either.
Read some of the links NaughtyBoy posted. Your argument is said many times in them and is ripped to shreds.
really? post some of them becouse the ones i have read is just silly.
"We brake for nobody"
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:28:00 -
[12]
no. nos are required. currently nos is a defense vs hacs and smaller ships [ IT IS NOT REALLY OFFENSIVE USED ON THOSE SHIPS]
once u dry a hacs cap via nos u dont gain any cap yourself. so you are useing a mod which is giving no cap to yuorself insted just used to stop the target shooting/tanking.
leave nos and neut alone. atm large nos = 2x med nos. its not bad
AND FYI i dont use nos on any of my ships so it wount effect me. yet it will boost hacs too much so no. neber
|
Necrologic
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:28:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock
Originally by: Necrologic
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock so? any module that works as anti smaller ship will be widely used so stop whining.
unless you want ship sized warp disruptors and webifiers (yes i think that is fair too, your hac shouldnt be able to warp disrupt a battleship) i suggest you to stop whining becouse if i got no defense against a smaller target a smaller target sure as hell should not have a chance against me either.
Read some of the links NaughtyBoy posted. Your argument is said many times in them and is ripped to shreds.
really? post some of them becouse the ones i have read is just silly.
I'm not looking through all those threads. Spent enough time writing them that i'm totally sick of this whole issue already.
|
Sky Hunter
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:44:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock so? any module that works as anti smaller ship will be widely used so stop whining.
unless you want ship sized warp disruptors and webifiers (yes i think that is fair too, your hac shouldnt be able to warp disrupt a battleship) i suggest you to stop whining becouse if i got no defense against a smaller target a smaller target sure as hell should not have a chance against me either.
Did i say i whine? Please refrain from any particular engagement descriptions.
1. There are BS sized webbers and scrambler/disruptors. Check officer modules. They arent costing too much, and they give good effect while, you can fit em only on the BS.
2. To someone who said nosf it back. How you suggest outnossin a 2 heavys nosfs with lets say 1 medium one? HACs slots arent BS slots. Its very tight to fit together and get one good setup that youll be able to use good(all comes at preferences - everyone fits like he feels more comfortable).
3. As for scrambling smaller targets. Well this will eliminate tacklers and everyone will happinly fly BS. -=-
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:54:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Sky Hunter
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock so? any module that works as anti smaller ship will be widely used so stop whining.
unless you want ship sized warp disruptors and webifiers (yes i think that is fair too, your hac shouldnt be able to warp disrupt a battleship) i suggest you to stop whining becouse if i got no defense against a smaller target a smaller target sure as hell should not have a chance against me either.
Did i say i whine? Please refrain from any particular engagement descriptions.
1. There are BS sized webbers and scrambler/disruptors. Check officer modules. They arent costing too much, and they give good effect while, you can fit em only on the BS.
2. To someone who said nosf it back. How you suggest outnossin a 2 heavys nosfs with lets say 1 medium one? HACs slots arent BS slots. Its very tight to fit together and get one good setup that youll be able to use good(all comes at preferences - everyone fits like he feels more comfortable).
3. As for scrambling smaller targets. Well this will eliminate tacklers and everyone will happinly fly BS.
never herd of a cap injecter?
|
OrangeAfroMan
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 19:59:00 -
[16]
Do you have to say you're whining for it to be whining?
No. HACs shouldnt be uncounterable vs Battleships. FFS they're BATTLESHIPS as in a class above you!! If you expect to kill one with even a t2 cruiser you should be dissappointed as you go pop. Or perhaps you could change your tactics? Top range for a TECH II heavy nos is 26metres. I hope an HAC can outrange that and can go faster than a battleship.
But wait, no, we dont want to change our tactics, change the game ffs! duh!
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:01:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Sky Hunter
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock so? any module that works as anti smaller ship will be widely used so stop whining.
unless you want ship sized warp disruptors and webifiers (yes i think that is fair too, your hac shouldnt be able to warp disrupt a battleship) i suggest you to stop whining becouse if i got no defense against a smaller target a smaller target sure as hell should not have a chance against me either.
Did i say i whine? Please refrain from any particular engagement descriptions.
1. There are BS sized webbers and scrambler/disruptors. Check officer modules. They arent costing too much, and they give good effect while, you can fit em only on the BS.
2. To someone who said nosf it back. How you suggest outnossin a 2 heavys nosfs with lets say 1 medium one? HACs slots arent BS slots. Its very tight to fit together and get one good setup that youll be able to use good(all comes at preferences - everyone fits like he feels more comfortable).
3. As for scrambling smaller targets. Well this will eliminate tacklers and everyone will happinly fly BS.
cool, then let us remove normal warp disruptors, we already have battleship disruptors. im glad we managed to talk it out, boy was i worried this might turn into a mess.
put it like this, your hac whatever it is should need to fitt reactor controls in low slot to fitt a disruptor, and cap injectors in medslots to keep the thing running right, then battleships can fitt small guns... im glad to agree. kthxbye
"We brake for nobody"
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:04:00 -
[18]
yep
FFS CCP change heavy nos to 6km or change it so it doesnt efect my hac/frig since i dont like fighting over the nos range. i dont like fitting nos to counter. i dont like useing cap injecters. and i wanna solo pawn thus my hac needs to be nos proof. i dont want to take a gang of 3. or use EW.
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:06:00 -
[19]
a mod to harden cap im all for though. a mid slot 50% less effect of nos and neut.
wonder how mnay people would bother lol. they just want an inbuilt im smaller then u so take less cap.
|
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:15:00 -
[20]
With current mechanics, heavy nos are the most effective (only effective?) defense for a battleship against smaller vessels. Any "nerfing" of them should be done with great care on ccp's part, or nobody will fly battleships anymore.
Having said that, I'm also a big proponent of "if you get caught solo in your slow-ass battleship, that's your bad, not CCPs."
I tend to fly cruisers (blaster boats, no less)most of the time. So I'd certainly enjoy some heavy nos relief, but I can't say it really needs nerfed. Cruiser class ships vs battleship class, you should need a bit of assistance to take down the battleship...and if that assistance is just one other cruiser with ecm, you still win.
Yes, a HAC costs more than a battleship, but that's not an accurate reflection of how it should perform against a battleship. It's an economic issue which opens up a whole other discussion. I've never felt that a HAC should be able to solo an effectively piloted and equiped battleship to begin with.
|
|
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:15:00 -
[21]
Any thread about nos quickly becomes a flame fest, this one doesn't seem to be an exception. It doesn't sound like a rational discussion so far, anyway. People are against the principle of changing nos, and do not even discuss how nos could be changed. This alone hints that some people are very worried about losing power. Good.
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
|
Slapudan
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:17:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Slapudan on 07/02/2006 20:20:28 Twonks! Surely if you expect a BS to be using 1 or 2 hvy nos then you counter. I'm talking about HACs here? Another dumb thread. I'm sorry. Your faster to get in tackle and solo / gang bang a BS and laugh (e.g. Deimos uses Nos anyway???) But too narrow minded to think of countering 1 or 2 hvy nos. Give it a break. Its pathetic.
It just sounds like my uber pwnmobile has a weakness and I don't want to change my 5-600 dps set up. CCP do something!
Craaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaap........
BS changes its set up for different situations or fits for many different situations at once with weaknesses vs its own class as a result. Please. Use the mods available to counter this. IT IS POSSIBLE!
|
Scalor Valentis
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:20:00 -
[23]
I want capital nosferatu, on carrier, and get bonus to cycle from minmatar one.
Then i want to see all BS pilots whine "omg my cap was gone in like 0.23225 nanosecond and bla bla bal...
Nos is "i win" button against small targets by default, period.
to resolve this, it needs to be based on siganture radius.
This way small targets, and minmatar ships will get lesser drain. Also this will encourage nosser ppls to use target paintters ^^
|
Scalor Valentis
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:24:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Garreck With current mechanics, heavy nos are the most effective (only effective?) defense for a battleship against smaller vessels. Any "nerfing" of them should be done with great care on ccp's part, or nobody will fly battleships anymore.
How is that BAD thing?
Right now the BS is MUST HAVE PVP TOOL! omg your so noob you dont have battleshi lolololol
Back in old good days, cruisers were sex. Now only 2 gambit's BS got as "i win" features are: Nosferatu/neut and Drones.
And drones are countareble, Nosses arent (cap injektors dont work as well as you think on small ships >__>)
|
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:27:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Scalor Valentis
Right now the BS is MUST HAVE PVP TOOL!
Heh. Incorrect.
|
Garreck
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:27:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Scalor Valentis
Nos is "i win" button against small targets by default, period.
to resolve this, it needs to be based on siganture radius.
Take away a Nos's effectiveness against smaller ships, though, and the cruiser becomes the "I win" button against battleships, eh?
As it stands, my only concern whilst flying a thorax or vigilant against a battleship is whether or not that battleship has Nos. If it doesn't, I've got a very good chance of taking that battleship solo. Tracking disrupted large turrets won't hit even a webbed target that's orbiting at 1km, and my drones can take care of his drones before they become too much of a problem. Then it's just a matter of time.
Nos changes all that. Against a nos-fitted battleship, I need either an ecm cruiser on my wing to jam the target, or a couple of cruisers on my wing to break the battleship's tank before any of us are out of cap. Frankly, that's balance in my book. It's not unreasonable to expect cruisers to have to team up against a battleship.
|
Valea Silpha
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:28:00 -
[27]
The problem is not that people want to be immune to NOS or don't want to change tactics or infact want to pwn everything in one ship. We'd just like to have some options. This is especially obvious in HAC vs BS arguaments.
Close range HAC's will ALWAYS be inside the NOS range of a BS. Is there any way you can change a deimoses tactics to be anywhere near as effective at 25km ? .... i somehow doubt it. Even if through some mirical you can, the other guy just warps away.
The problem is that all you BS pilots don't want to change your tactics to have to maybe use med drones or mount two webbers or do something other than just use a cookie cutter 6 big guns and 2 nos set-up. If you are THAT worried about close range HACs beating you up (of which i count 2, maybe three if a zealot pilot feels adventurous) then there are other ways to counter them. ECM perhaps ? Tracking disruptors ? Double webs are an old favorite certainly.
HAC's are ALL vulnerable, and to many more things than just NOS, especially since at least 3 will be outside NOS range and still kicking your arse.
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:30:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Sky Hunter I know im usually against whining threads, but this one became something i cant go past.
Over past week i encounterd various BSs with various setups and from various corps/alliances. But in 80% of cases, if BS was engaging me he had at least 2 Heavy nosfs.
This is for sure means 'no go' for almost any HAC. I mean ok, people use nosfs now against NPCs, but not when a pilot slaps a nosferatu on every BS he can get into.
Fighting from outside Heavy NOS range 4tw?
Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu I'm probably one of the biggest Bush fanboys in Eve... This is like, Darth Vader, can't-reach-climax-without-killing-a-puppy evil.
RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran |
Necrologic
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:32:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Gronsak yep
FFS CCP change heavy nos to 6km or change it so it doesnt efect my hac/frig since i dont like fighting over the nos range. i dont like fitting nos to counter. i dont like useing cap injecters. and i wanna solo pawn thus my hac needs to be nos proof. i dont want to take a gang of 3. or use EW.
You can't fight over nos range without faction disrupters. You can't fit nos to counter because smaller are less effective. If the bs has 2 nos you need 4 med nos. Show me the hac that can fit 4 med nos and still do enough dps to even slightly worry a bs. Cap injectors work but only abit. Fitting nos does not gimp your setup. Fitting cap injectors does. I'm sure some people want to solo pwn, but that is not the objective of most. And the bs can solo pwn with nos, why can't other people? Why should you need 3 hacs (which cost more than a bs) to take on a bs? Smaller ships can rarly do ew effectivly enough to fight bs 1v1. If they can they probably don't have the dps to break a bs tank. This is fine of course, smaller ships should only kill bs 1v1 with very specific setups, but nos are very effective against other bs and extremely effective against smaller ships. Win win situation unlike any other module in the game.
|
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2006.02.07 20:42:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Garreck With current mechanics, heavy nos are the most effective (only effective?) defense for a battleship against smaller vessels. Any "nerfing" of them should be done with great care on ccp's part, or nobody will fly battleships anymore.
That's the root of the problem. And it doesn't even matter if nos are the only effective defense against smaller ships, or not.
If it is the only defense (it's not but whatever), then it's a big problem in a game with so many options/fitting/ships. It all only depends on whether you fit this type of mod or not, it's very "flat" in such a complex game. nos => win, no nos => no win. We need more options, maybe more flavors of nosferatus. And less versatility for each kinds, choices are good, that's what makes strategy.
If it is not, then where's the issue? If there are other ways to deal with smaller ships, interclass balance is being taken care of, nosferatus can be balanced as a mod and to account for they effects on smaller ships (the bigger the nos the worse for the smaller ships), and it's interesting to see proposals for that (something that would be more constructive than the "nos are fine noob" "no they are not idiot" kind of crap).
And finally, if the consequence of the nerfing of nosferatus is that nobody ever fly a battleship anymore, didn't (as the OP pointed out) the nosferatu become a "must have" mod, something that is a problem in the game design (there are already enough "must have" mods, to the point despite its damage/tank the retribution is said totally gimped for pvp...). "Must have" mods kills diversity in fitting, as their versatility makes them the best overall choice. No diversity leads to predictability. When a mod (or ship), despite being so predictable, still isn't countered well enough (see WCS for instance, very similar issue), you have a problem (what people call, and overpowered mod/ship). And it's even worse when the mod is one of the best counter to itself, it's even more predictable. There is no choice anymore, there is no strategy.
This all was said/forecasted months ago, and even more when it became clear that the change in the stacking penalty and the tanking change would improve the role of the nosferatu against any kind of opponent (nosferatu gained a lot of versatility since RMR).
Originally by: Slapudan Flame
Thanks for proving my point. Afraid of losing power? The excessive versatility of battleships is a problem. Less versatility is less power, so far so good...
Whatever, I wrote a book about this already.
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |